amideislas

I really don't want to argue the point - not because I can't substantiate it, but because it's like arguing whether rocks are made of rock. Besides, the debate is about why I "think" I'm always right, which I argue is a perception rather than reality.

Still, as I said, I have offered quite of bit of evidence to support my views, unlike the objectors. People can choose to accept it or not. Obviously, the latter is more appealing. And no need to offer any evidence refuting it, simply referring to it as a 'crock' proves I'm wrong, as well as exposes my entire character.

If you look back at my original statement that was rubbished, I did qualify my point by specifically indicating "native" speakers. True, English is indeed the "most spoken" language, particularly as a second language. But it's not the most natively spoken language, just as I said. I predicted some would rubbish that notion, and surprise, I wasn't far off the mark with that expectation either.

On the other hand, depending on the point of objection, many Brits would passionately claim that other forms of English aren't English at all (e.g., American, Aussie), but simply unsophisticated, bastardised interpretations of it, although in this case, that argument would only serve my point.

Still, another example of Ami "always thinking she's right" (yet another 'crock' from that arrogant troll bitch), not because it's untrue, but because it's a kind of blasphemy. As another poster previously implied in another debate, it's the arrogance of those "third-world" people like me to believe 'crock' like this.

Anyway, that brings to mind - where did this quote come from? I think it was from an old movie;

"We're English, my dear. Arrogance is beneath us".

robin1234

Sorry about quoting myself, I know it's bad form.

Please note, amideislas, I merely questioned the data in (1) the wikipedia article and (2) the Swedish encyclopedia on which it was based. I made no attacks on you, your postings, and I didn't make any ad hominem intemperate comments.

I note that there are several pages of postings on the topic that you don't adress at all, as Sultan suggests, you maybe turned over a couple of pages!

amideislas

Fair enough. But it's still a 'crock' innit? Despite all evidence to the contrary. And that, my friends, again proves "she always thinks she's right".

SultanOfSwing

But even then, that number in the article you quoted was still off for native speakers, as demonstrated by the populations of the USA (even allowing for the 5% or so who are not native speakers) and the UK alone, which get you damn near the 360 million without even considering Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Canada. The number of native English speakers worldwide is much closer to 450 million. Obviously when you consider non-native speakers, it's up around a billion, but that's not being discussed here.

All that Robin pointed out was that the article contained erroneous information. He wasn't shooting the messenger or anything, just correcting your source, for the sake of accuracy.

The rest though, I'm at a loss as to what that's all about

amideislas

Here you go:

Ok, perhaps the wiki link more or less differs from the hundreds of other research results I could post, but the general wisdom amongst them all is that Spanish is the 2nd most common native language, which is what I asserted, and what was challenged. I responded with more evidence - just as I said I do. Contradictory evidence conspicuously absent from the opposing argument, though.

But who cares? Really. I have little belief that anyone involved in this debate really gives a flying fark about which language is more common than another.

But.. proving I'm wrong about it is kind of exciting, innit? After all, that bitch thinks she's always right (see provocative post that started this). Besides, it's simple to prove it: Just say it's a crock. End of debate, eh?

And we wonder why the world has problems.

SultanOfSwing

Whatever anybody else said is irrelevant to me, I don't care one bit about what someone else is perceived to think about you. Not quite sure why you need to keep bringing that stuff up when neither Robin, nor I had anything to do with it.

The only thing that was being discussed was the link you posted claimed that the number of native English speakers worldwide was 360 million. Robin (I think he was the first anyway) and a few others pointed out that the number is closer to 450 million. That's it. Nobody to the best of my knowledge claimed English was the most widely spoken native language or second most or whatever, only the most widely spoken when all speakers were taken into account. Spanish didn't even come into it, as far as I remember. It's still pretty close between the two either way.

robin1234

I said that first Wikipedia article, which was based on a Swedish encyclopedia of languages published in 2007, was a crock, which it was. I haven't looked at the source, the Swedish encyclopedia.

Who is to say though. Wikipedia has decent articles on individual countries, they can easily be located since the titles are in a standard format (Languages of Argentina, Languages of Bolivia, etc.) Problem is, the data is compiled and defined differently in each article.

Bolivia has 36 official languages. Spanish is spoken by 75% of the population. 44% speak ONLY Spanish. So what percentage of the Bolivian population have Spanish as their "mother tongue?" Or their primary language?

In Argentina, the languages spoken by more than 100,000 people are, in descending order;
Spanish
Italian
Arabic
Quechua
German
Yiddish
Mapudungan.

Now, I assume that all the 200,000 Yiddish speakers in Argentina also speak Spanish. (Etc. etc.)

amideislas

Sigh.

OK you win. It's a 'crock' that Spanish is the 2nd most common native language in the world. Even though it certainly seems to be the overriding wisdom amongst all those who've conducted such research.

But really, why does it matter so much? Just to prove I'm wrong? OK fine, I capitulate in the interest of making you feel better.

Have a nice day.

robin1234

I don't get it. Do you not read, or even scan, posts? That is not at all what I wrote. I will restate it in capital letters. IN MY OPINION, THAT ONE ARTICLE FROM WIKIPEDIA THAT YOU FIRST LINKED TO IS A CROCK.

This is not in any way a comment on the published research that the article is based on. It is not in any way a comment on other publications and research that is available.

amideislas

Well, isn't that a bit pedantic?

robin1234

Yes, I agree that restating what I wrote in a couple of earlier posts is pedantic.

Jerseygirl

Less of the 'bitch' word please.

SultanOfSwing

The **** is going on in here anyway?

markonline1

The Internet is what is going on here LOL

SultanOfSwing

Yeah, silly question, I suppose.